3 ms·
That is exactly low trust environment. Trust requires that you accept that you can be hurt by the person you trust. If you work to remove that ability you are
by lmilcin 5y ago
That is exactly low trust environment.
Trust requires that you accept that you can be hurt by the person you trust. If you work to remove that ability you are saying you do not trust that other person.
Now, I am not saying that you should design processes so that employees can fail them.
What I am saying is that when somebody is a developer and the company says it is ok to "burn" their time and effort because they do not trust the developer to make a right decision, it sucks and it makes it very difficult for that person to care to do a good job.
There are usually different ways to prevent things from failing that do not require the organization to manifest that it does not trust their employees. And there are ways for the organization to show they trust their employees to make up for the cases when these types of solutions can't be implemented.
I worked in Samsung. In the office I worked, there is a ban on having knives in the kitchen, even the cutlery that is basically unusable to cut anything more substantial than overcooked potatoes. I heard the same for all other offices. Apparently, two guys half a world away had a knife fight in the kitchen and so it was decided every single employee is not to be trusted handling cutlery. The funny thing is, people started bringing their own, really sharp knives. So... knives are still there but employees have one more reminder that they are not being treated as adults.
I worked in a large number of companies, from small to very, very large ones. They all vary a lot in the level of permission any single employee has to do things.
But one thing I noticed is that companies where employees have very little permission to do anything do not have less process failures.
There is many reasons for this. Now that you made your employees impotent, you need a lot more of them to do the same work. Or maybe you need to shift the responsibilities from real thinking people to automation that can also make mistakes but with a much larger impact. People that are constantly reminded they are not trusted start behaving this way. They tend to lower standards and stop caring.
Taking somebodys permission to do something can be done well but it usually requires much more care and thought than what typically happens at large corporations.
- afarrell 5y agoWhen I do carpentry, I make and use wooden jigs when I identify situations where I know my hands will not be steady enough. This is good poka-yoke. If someone forced me to use their jigs taylor-made to their workflow (however scientifically managed), that would be a low-trust environment.
- lmilcin 5y agoI understand this. The difference is that when somebody implements RCA findings this usually results in mandatory overhead. That is not the case with a wooden jig which you can decide to skip if it does not suit your next item you are working on. And that is the point. If I gave you the wooden jig to help you make better job but allowed you to skip it when you know better -- it shows that I trust your judgement and I only care to give you tools to help you make better job (safer). But if I give you wooden jig and tell you you are going to be fired if I see you not using it regardless of how little sense it makes just because some other employee showed bad judgment once, I am saying that I do not care for you as an individual and not only I do not trust you, I do not trust you so much that I would willingly cripple your ability to do good job just to make it less likely you make a particular type of error.